111 comments:

(The Crypto Jew)Meh, it's not important, we ahd diversity in our hearts and social justice on our minds, and Obama upon our lips...

Why would we need more? Any way, the clean-up is for the Proletarians who can't afford college. It's job security for them, really.

I mean, I woodda cleaned up, a bit, but there was this hot Asian chic in the third row and I had to move in on her, plus my friends had my bong and I wasn't going to let them out of my sight...especially with the hot Asian chic, there...I mean what pulls hippie chics faster'n weed?

EPR: Street sweepers shoveled horse pooh off the the streets. Flies and Skeeters just loved all that fresh pooh.

I've read articles estimating that about 2-million pounds of pooh were dumped each day on NYC's streets; can't claim the accuracy of those claims but believe it had to be a pile of pooh each day; not quite the same thing as Sioux City's million dollar pile.

I'm going to assume the tea partiers in Madison cleaned up after themselves, given the comparison in this post, but were there 26,500 of them (as the Madison police dept. estimated at the Obama rally)? I don't think anyone should be littering, regardless of political affiliation, but comparing a Madison Tea Party rally to a Madison Obama rally without having both sets of numbers of attendees hardly seems fair. If someone can point me to a rough number of attendees at the Madison Tea Party rally, maybe I'll start taking this criticism a little more seriously.

I don't have a theory. I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that Althouse was implying a comparison between two rallies that occurred in Madison, and the consideration of each for picking up after themselves. I came to this assumption considering that she attended both rallies and was able to assess the amount of litter at both.

This is why I'm reluctant to comment on this blog. If I give any pushback whatsoever to something posted--you know, start a dialogue--I'm met with people already assuming I have some sort of agenda, and those, like you, assuming I'm stupid. I lived in DC. I know what the Mall is. But Althouse didn't reference any of the Tea Party rallies in DC, Glenn Beck's or any others. I wasn't responding to commenters, I was simply responding to the post.

I think if there were 300,000 people there as one commenter estimated (although I must say my quick google search led me to a CBS story saying 87,000 http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014993-503544.html) that is quite impressive if they were neater than the 26,000 people at Obama's rally in Madison.

Assuming it is true, I don't have an explanation for that. Maybe, as some have argued, "college students are messier" is a more likely conclusion than ideology. I honestly can't think of a non-absurd reason why political ideology has anything to do with littering. It is quite easy to use the political ideology rationale in an attempt to polarize groups of people, so it's no surprise that some would prefer that be the reason.

I think it's inarguable that all large collections of people (e.g. rallies) leave quite a lot of litter behind. Certainly every one I've seen has. The Beck rally on the D.C. mall is a singular exception. Make of that what you will. I think it saya a lot about the conscientiousness of the people who attended that rally.

Well, Anthony, you managed to find the LEAST credible count in your searches. The conservative estimate is closer to 300,000 but <a href="http://bigjournalism.com/mopelka/2010/08/30/just-how-large-was-the-attendance-at-becks-restoring-honor-rally/>Big Journalism</a> puts it at 500,000.

The pushback you experience comes from people pretending to be honest seekers/purveyors of info who then reveal themselves--to a one--as raging leftists.

Reasonable people can disagree as to the exact number of people at the Restoring Honor rally, but 87,000 isn't a reasonable estimate, and--despite Jeremy's jeremiads--there's no debate as to how clean they left it, which is far cleaner than the 27,000 in attendance in Madison yesterday.

And this cleanliness--respect for public property, some might call it--has been repeated in Tea Party after Tea Party.

Despite the perfect weather, attendance at this year's Madison Tea Party was FAR lower than last year.

Based on an actual photographic count, there were only 2,600 people at the event earlier today, compared to 8,000 in 2009. One-third the size of last year! This is a massive drop, and it indicates that both the size and the influence of the the Wisconsin Tea Party are rapidly declining.

It's a philosophical thing. Obama and his fans want bigger government. Cleaning up litter is a government job. A lot of litter makes work for government workers, and demonstrates the need for them. The more litter gets left, the more workers have jobs, and the presence of the litter demonstrates that the large government workforce is a necessity. Tea partiers want smaller government. By cleaning up after themselves, they deprive these workers of their livelihoods. Therefore we can see that the Tea Partiers are against the working class!

The most basic Bush numbers are damning. If increases in government spending matter, then Mr. Bush is worse than any president in recent history. During his first four years in office -- a period during which his party controlled Congress -- he added a whopping $345 billion (in constant dollars) to the federal budget.

The only other presidential term that comes close? Mr. Bush's second term. As of November 2008, he had added at least an additional $287 billion on top of that (and the months since then will add significantly to the bill). To put that in perspective, consider that the spendthrift LBJ added a mere $223 billion in total additional outlays in his one full term.

If spending under Mr. Bush was a disaster, regulation was even worse. The number of pages in the Federal Registry is a rough proxy for the swollen expanse of the regulatory state.

In 2001, some 64,438 pages of regulations were added to it. In 2007, more than 78,000 new pages were added. Worse still, argues the Mercatus Center economist Veronique de Rugy, Mr. Bush is the unparalleled master of "economically significant regulations" that cost the economy more than $100 million a year.

Since 2001, he jacked that number by more than 70%. Since June 2008 alone, he introduced more than 100 economically significant regulations

Jeremy: I have not made fun of your name. However, two minor points. Do it again and your name will wind up being used in ways you will not like. Also, if you ever say that to my face, I shall physically rearrange your face. Do not doubt me, Jeremy.

I see no one has the guts or intelligence to refute the Bush years of government expansion.

What a shocker.

Why should they? Most Conservatives railed against it, but Jeremy thinks that quoting a WSJ piece, dated January 2009, calling Dubya's spending " a disaster" gets The Zero off the hook.

The Zero spent as much in one year as Dubya did in eight and expanded government in directions clearly against the will of the people. When you claim you're in a hole (assuming you don't intend to do much worse), you don't keep digging.

I have heard that there is no litter in Singapore (or chewing gum, for that matter).

The difference is the tea partiers pick up after themselves (and others) as a lifestyle / values choice. Something to do with personal responsibility as well as self discipline. Less entitlement thinking.

See -- there they go again -- making choices! Darn those conservatives.

"Apparently, I represent all of the things this group hates about the mainstream media," she wrote. "They feel because of the way I look that I do not matter, and that my reporting is a joke. They don't know anything about my work ethic - my history - my dedication and commitment - and my love for reporting. They just saw my blonde hair. And the ironic thing is that I'm really a brunette."

My Dad died on Monday. He was very involved in charity and worked for the United Way. Because of his community involvement, there there was an article about him today in a metro paper. The article made it sound as though he detested the for-profit world which is absolutely false. It's as though in the language of journalism, good person = hates business. What crap. My father was a conservative of the libertarian sort. Really hacks me off that his name was used today to bash profit. He would never have agreed with that.

Freeman, my condolences. In my previous work life, I had the opportunity to sit on numerous nonprofit committees & boards. It was the guys (and ladies) like your father that were the catalyst that made things happen - his community also lost something this week.

If you haven't already done so, read "Who Really Cares" by Arthur Brooks. Good book that shows who really gives money and time to social causes.

The GOP and Tea Party press (fox news,eg) is not very friendly. That is why we must continue to pressure everyone to support the President, Speaker, and Majority Leader (Obama/Biden, Pelosi, and Reid).